We Don’t Want Ideological Diversity

I realized after I wrote this that it could stand for my mandatory Diversity statement.

We want Truth and Reality to be represented in academia. We certainly don’t need racial or sexual-desire Diversity, or any other Diversity based on non-intellectual ability. Pursuing Diversity of this kind is harmful to thinking.

The only Diversity we want and require is the Diversity in understanding the different aspects of Truth and Reality. Not every man of high intellect can be a physicist; some must become metaphysicists, a higher and more difficult calling. There must be poets and historians. And so forth.

We certainly don’t want or need ideological Diversity. Seeking it is a dumb idea.

Just think: if we required ideological Diversity in the same way we require skin color, “gender”, and perversion Diversity, with all of its monitoring and enforcement of quotas, mandatory oaths and ignorant screeching undergraduates, then we’d have our universities stuffed with measured fractions of feminist logicians, Wiccan theosophists, communists, extinction advocates, “I demand the right to kill my children!” reproductive health advocates, utilitarians, even, God help us, neoconservatives.

If the number of professors holding an ideology must exist in the same ratio as they exist in the population, why, we’d have universities that look not that different from those we already have. Except, perhaps, in political party affiliation, which is at best a weak indication of ideology.

There is no end of variation in ideology. Just like “gender”, ideologies are born in the imagination, which is infinite in its capacity. And also like “gender”, no proof except desire is needed to justify an ideology. Requiring any kind of Diversity, except the conditional high ability kind mentioned above, is to pursue the unattainable and create frustrations that can be never be assuaged.

So much for that. Now we come to the meat: Study: Professors Donate To Democrats Over Republicans By A 95:1 Ratio.

Diversity in hiring is the top priority of most colleges and universities. However, the effort to hire more women, minorities, and LGBT individuals notably lacks one group: ideological diversity. It is well-known that most faculty are composed of an overwhelming majority of liberal and democratic members. However, this view, while generally accepted, is largely anecdotal. Now a new study by Heterodox Academy Director of Research Sean Stevens and Brooklyn College Professor Mitchell Langbert claims to have put hard numbers on that lack of diversity. In reviewing records with the Federal Election Commission, they say that they found that professors gave to Democrats over Republicans by a 95:1 ratio.

The study itself acknowledges “while party affiliation imperfectly correlates with political ideology or values,” they still say “the correlation is significant, and the increasing prevalence of independents is probably less important than it seems.”

That correlation is weak. Almost no, or even no registered Democrats would identify as reactionary, whereas a fraction of Republicans would. “Conservative” is a dead word used now only to frighten children.

Of course, there are many professors who don’t affiliate with any party, or whose affiliation is only nominal and social. There are still, for instance, many true math nerds who might even call themselves Democrats but whose only real interest in life is in chasing theorems, people who still care deeply about proofs to the extent they do not advocate redefining math as that which each “culture” calls math.

Still, this number must be low and will diminish, because of the spread of the mandatory Diversity Inclusion an Equity (DIE, from Steve Sailer) oaths for hiring and promotion. Here’s one professor trying to rebel in as strong a way as he dares, as he applies for a merit raise. How many able, and even superior, men are not hired because they refuse the oath?

I use mathematicians as an example, because mathematics as a discipline has long been associated with Truth and Reality. Toss these out and you toss out the meaning of math: whence proof without Truth? And indeed, the Heterodox study found mathematicians had the lowest left to right ratio, which was still 5.5 to 1 in favor of Democrats. In contrast, Anthropology, which used to have the same ideals as mathematics, the ratio is 42.2 to 1.

It’s the ideals that must have changed. Real anthropology is impossible in a system ruled by the ideology of Equality. By definition, all men are the same; therefore, all conclusions of all anthropological studies are preordained.

The same will be true in math and in every field the further they drift into the ideology of DIE. Or into any ideology that is not aimed at Truth and Reality.

So again I conclude the seeking Diversity of ideology, or of skin color, or of anything not related to ability is wrong and wrongheaded.

6 Thoughts

  1. We do have diversity in these colleges—there are hundreds of different conspiracy theories on why Orange Man Bad, the die-hard progressives have been known to eat each other when there’s even the slightest disagreement (a fleeting diversity, yes, but at least a bit of hope that Darwin may still be considered correct), and those that choose Starbucks over another coffee spot. There are the Android users and the Iphone users. There are those whose parents slipped a few bills to the right person to get them in and those who got in by skin color or claimed gender. The producing class occassionally slip in by dressing down and talking like they know nothing (intelligence and class are forbidden, of course). If found out, they are removed immediately. One can get in by appearing to be a fan of CNN OR CNBC. Diversity, right? Once in a while a meat-eater gets through but eats off-campus. Come on, you’re just not looking in the right places.

    As for diversity of anything significant, useful or non-divisive, I think hell will freeze before we see that again, but it’s just a guess. As you say, nuke ’em from space or learn to love being a Delta.

  2. But according to the egalitarians everybody is the same so the quest for diversity is a fools quest. Just ask the feminists and they will assure you that men and women are the same.

  3. Actually, I am in favor of a rigid quota system that includes every possible classification of people in use. So, e.g., 30% each of faculty, staff, and students must be Catholic; 2% Jews; 50% male; 40% conservative; 12% black; and so on.

    The quotas must apply to every part of the university, individual academic departments, sports teams, campus cops and cafeteria workers, and administrators at all levels. No lumping of academic departments. Women’s studies must be 50% male and 30% Catholic.

    I do not stop there. I would a lottery system, properly randomized (I know. I wanted to jerk your chain.) to assign students, faculty, and staff to individual schools. The Ivies and other private schools would be in the pool, too, along the B1G and other conferences. Schools would have to admit or hire whatever the lottery sent.

    Students and faculty get into the lottery pools merely by applying to the lottery administrator. No SAT or essay or letter of reference. I suppose you could insist on a high school diploma for undergrads, a BA/BS for grads, and a PhD for faculty. But that’s it.

    All colleges and universities would be expanded in size the the B1G norm, 40,000 to 50,000 students (Harvard, Yale, too), so school prestige would even out.

    Also, federal research grants would be assigned to faculty by the same lottery agency.

    Now you have true equality

    Now you have true equality

  4. The laxity of the Catholic Church concerning freeing people from counterfeit sexualities, other than the heterosexuality which God created, is much at the root of the growth of the huge public proclamations of same sex attraction, transgendering in all its forms and more.

    If the Catholic Church offered freedom from these counterfeit sexualities instead of just saying these conditions are deep-seated, which in many cases they are, and instead of just offering solace and participation in Catholic parishes, which it does probably to the detriment of the youth, and instead of just offering the guidance to pray much so as not to act on the above counterfeits, which it does, then so many Catholics and others would be living in Christ’s true peace of God’s creation of heterosexuality.

    Why the Catholic Church does not perform this ministry, it seems only the hierarchy knows. May God have mercy on those who ought to be performing this ministry for those suffering from same sex attraction, and suffering from more.

    The World is going on more and more weirdly, accepting more and more untruths and lies, as truths. Legislation will never be able to handle all of the “diversities” popping up everywhere, as the legislation would be attempting to legislate much that is against God, and therefore will fail, freedoms much curtailed and huge government in charge of all. This will be unless people turn back to God. So very sad, but not surprising.

    The two diversity claims of: being denied employment based on ethnicity and or being denied due to skin color, ought not to be. No one ought to be denied employment, nor schooling, based on those two.
    God bless, C-Marie

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *